I know I know, there are a ton of threads about the FWE, but I got some really nice pictures of the new engine that were just too good not to post. Notice that the heat pattern is the same as the other engine.

Larry I keep forgetting to ask you about posters.... How big are they and where can I get one? I soon will have one of the engines full liquid carburated ready for control line plane/ rc car testing. I would imagine it could make for a wicked poster.

Eric

edit...ok the pictures were giving me a hard time... oh yae also notice the V shaped cool spot behind the spark plug, its barely noticeable. Might be from some strange dynamics generated by me having the spark gap sticking way in there... or not.

Eric wrote:I know I know, there are a ton of threads about the FWE, but I got some really nice pictures of the new engine that were just too good not to post. Notice that the heat pattern is the same as the other engine.

Larry I keep forgetting to ask you about posters.... How big are they and where can I get one? I soon will have one of the engines full liquid carburated ready for control line plane/ rc car testing. I would imagine it could make for a wicked poster.

Eric -

Man, those are nice shots. I still think the linear FWE turns out to be the most beautiful looking pulsejet ever! I really ought to save up and buy one from you. Stainless, of course. I also always enjoy seeing your 'Ironman' vise, and am amused this time by the ground clamp on the handle ...

Well, I still owe you one free poster [your choice] and a certificate for your development work. So just email me with your selection. My promotion of the posters is apparently pretty ineffective - the last one I sold was the one on eBay for disaster relief. I just got a new order for one from my ex-business partner, but that's all. Yes, if you get a really good shot of a carbureted one running, that would be cool, as would any of the pix posted here.

Hi,
The engine is 1 pound with the spark plug, puts out about 1.5 pounds thrust with a basic recouperator and, you can check out my brand new website www.Beck-Technologies.com under the gallery section for more pictures and videos. I currently have the engine on ebay, and if you click on the link in the auction you can see a pretty decent quality 1:15 long video of it running.

Eric

Talking like a pirate does not qualify as experience, this should be common sense, as pirates have little real life experience in anything other than smelling bad, and contracting venereal diseases

I was wondering if anyone has made a valveless pulse jet that can compete with a valved one? In thrust that is...

Hagen

There's virtually no valved design that can compete with the current range of valveless engines--when they're optimized (and there's a whole lot of them that are NOT optimized!).

In addition, if you factor-in the issue of reliability, there's simply no comparison. Valved designs measure their operating life in mintues--or even seconds; OTOH the valveless designs can be made to last as long as the designer wants--and, there's no moving parts.

: So far what would you consider is the best valveless design?

There's no simple answer to this; the complexities of size (and thrust range) are too involved to make any realistic evaluation.

Also, based on current info there's more than one configuration that can do the job you want!. Stay tuned--things are developing rapidly.

Bill H.
Acoustic Propulsion Concepts

".......some day soon we'll be flying airplanes powered by pulsejets."

Putting aside reliability for a moment, if I had to classify what's better I would first start with weight to thrust ratio and then fuel consumption.

When you said "There's virtually no valved design that can compete with the current range of valveless engines--when they're optimized "

Do you mean that given aprox. the same size and weight that a well tuned valveless engine will have greater thrust to weight ratio than a valved design?

Sorry I always thought that the valved engines out performed in this area.

Did I understand you correctly?

Hagen

Replying in order of your post:

Welcome to the world of pulsejets. I hope you will become an active member of SCCA (that's the "Southern California Combustion Association")--look for a previous post on this.

Re: Thrust to weight ratio: I think the valved designs may own the lower end of the thrust scale--if you evaluate only the engine weight. Based on fuel consumption, and engine weight--I suspect that the valveless rules, even in the "lightweight" end of the range. A little simple math will confirm this, one way or t'other.

In the larger sizes, there's no comparison. I have already operated valveless pulsejets that exceed comparable turbojets in fuel economy, and I hope to improve on that performance significantly in the near future.

It's exciting times for our little hobby, and there's a lot more to come.

Bill H.
Acoustic Propulsion Concepts

".......some day soon we'll be flying airplanes powered by pulsejets."

Valveless engines definately hold the most potential, its just tapping the potential that is a bit tricky. Valved engines you just tweak a few things and bam you have a decent engine. Valveless engines require all that damn math with the ocasional greek leter and those stupid little deltas... damn those deltas grumble grumble....

Bill was that fuel efficient one the escreveise type device?

Eric

Talking like a pirate does not qualify as experience, this should be common sense, as pirates have little real life experience in anything other than smelling bad, and contracting venereal diseases